About your Search

20130126
20130203
STATION
CSPAN 9
MSNBC 5
MSNBCW 5
CNN 3
CNNW 3
CSPAN2 2
KNTV (NBC) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 40
Search Results 0 to 39 of about 40 (some duplicates have been removed)
, and i think now it would make sense that we have sent troops to deploy nato patriot missiles to defend turkey against syria, they see that as something that goes against their fundamentalist ideological thinking, and as a result of that, the group has been called into action. unfortunately, as small as this group might be, one could anticipate future targets on u.s. interests in turkey should further nay to have or troop and hardware ce employments take place in theing months. -- in the coming months. jenna: what do you think is the correct united states response? >> well, first of all, we have to be very serious. this is an attack on a nato country inside a nato country. turkey's a great ally. they've been a member of nato since 1951, and this is a serious attack. this is the eighth attack on an embassy under hillary clinton alone. so we have to have a tough response. i think that it's also very interesting that these attacks are happening when the u.s. policy in the region is really withdrawn. we are not active in syria. we are doing just little, minor things around the edges, and ye
control of the american administration, that the u.s. is an imperial power. it opposes nato. a bit of a throwback group, a far-left marxist group. has some ties in europe and it has consistently attacked turkish authorities and sometimes business interests as well. and this time the u.s. embassy. according to tush irk authorities who have identified the bomber from remains, he was closer to 40 years old and had actually spent four years in a turkish prison for militant activity. but he was released for medical reasons. chaos of police and ambulances in one of ankara's most fortified districts, embassy row. on one stretcher, a well-known turkish journalist. she had come to have tea with the ambassador. she was at a visitor's gate in a security screening room when a suicide bomber came in, and reached for his waist. a guard yelled bomb and then it exploded. turkish media identified the bomber who killed himself and a turkish guard. >> right now, we're all dealing with our sadness at the loss of our fellow member of our embassy, we salute his bravery. >> reporter: the turkish governme
of being an american puppet of imperialism. the group hates u.s. influence and that turkey is part of nato, which recently deployed patriot missiles here. this was not al qaeda, but marxist, the government says, who just last september bombed a police station in istanbul. no matter who was responsible, u.s. officials perhaps gun shy after benghazi were quick to call it terrorism. >> what was characterized as a terrorist attack. >> a suicide bombing on the perimeter of an embassy is by definition an act of terror. it is a terrorist attack. >> reporter: tonight, u.s. diplomats are cautioning americans to be vigilant in turkey, even though it has been considered one of the safest countries in the middle east. an embassy guard was killed, but the suicide bomber never managed to get beyond the outer checkpoint. the embassy building itself wasn't breached, brian. >> richard engel on the job for us in turkey tonight. richard, thank you. >>> there was more violence in egypt today. this time outside the presidential palace there. a large protest directed at president mohamed morsi. some of the prot
on this. trace, listen, a week ago nato reported that at least one of those missile systems was up and running. >> it is, on top of that shep, there are some 400 u.s. troops on the ground ready to man those missiles in case they are needed. not just to keep the war in syria from spilling into turkey. but also to pressure syrian president bashar assad from using chemical weapons. since the syrian civil war broke out, turkey and the u.s. have gotten closer. nothing new because the u.s. has provided turkey with some $15 billion in arms over the past 60 years. and the marxist groups in turkey, like the ones said to be responsible for today's bombing do not like that. listen. >> they probably have only a few hundred members but they are active and they are kind of triggered into action. it's almost as if they are sleepers. triggered into action whenever the united states sends troops and personnel over to these countries, such as turkey, then you see them come into action. >> he went on to say marxist groups in turkey are much smaller today than they were some 20 or 30 years ago. clearl
what to do with libya that would bring an unprecedented coalition between arab and nato countries, or whether it was just looking down the road at how we were doing diplomacy and introducing new tools into that mix, it was a very different time than ten, 20, 30, 40 years ago. i've kidded our mutual friend, henry kissinger, think how impossible it would have been for him to sneak off to china in the age of cell phones, twitter, facebook, everything else. it is a time that is testing us. i think we're passing the test, and quite comfortably, but the whole world scene is one now that is so quickly changing and challenging us that, you know, the traditional mode of doing diplomacy is not enough for what we face. >> what do you think didn't go well, what went wrong? >> well, benghazi went wrong. you know, that was a terrible example of trying to get the right balance of being in a threatening place or not being there, looking after american interests, which meant keeping an eye on the militants and extremists who we knew were reconstituting themselves in eastern libya, trying to track
admired in the senate. i worked with him closely when i was an ambassador to n.a.t.o. i found him to always be very fair and very thoughtful. we have a very tough challenge with iran. iran is resisting negotiations. they won't even agree to show up at the p-5 negotiations with the the other countries. if they don't show up with the negotiations it will be give for the obama administration to go not go down that use of force which no one wants to go down. it's important that we send a tough message to iran and that is that the use of force is on the table unless they negotiate fairly. i'm with the president of wanting to negotiate with diplomacy. we need an united team in washington, so i hope he's confirmed. i hope he's confirmed expeditiously in the senate. >> jennifer: we're all hoping that. we are hoping to send a strong message and a strong team to represent us across the world. we thank you for coming to the war room. former u.s. ambassador nicholas burns. coming up, congress gets to pick it's spots in dealing with gun violence. unfortunately, community leaders on the front l
and thinking about syria, think about the nato patriot missiles that are now there. he's going to be thinking about what the diplomatic and assistance side is of what is going on in mali which he will know quite well because the u.s. has been trying to support the emergence of a democratic government there for well over a decade. so those two crises are both great examples of where, as senator kerry, he traveled the world. he met with leaders. so the challenge that he has is to go from being someone who's able to drop in and then follow in an oversight role to being the person who really has to make the decisions and who has to say, you know, if mali is a priority, egypt is a priority, turkey is a priority, the conflict between china, japan, and south korea is a worry, the worry about a north korean nuclear test is a priority. we could go on and on. a secretary of state's job really is to keep all those balls in the air so, frankly, we're on tv talking about them as little as possible. >> right. you know, michael, the other thing that strikes me that now-secretary kerry is going to have to de
closely, closely with our lo longtime allies of nato and our friends and with allies and p t partners and friends in other regions of the world. at the same time we will continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where we have clear national interests. rather as recognition the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. in the asian pacific power it is increasingly vital to america's security and economic interests. that's why we must become even more engage d in the region ove the incoming years. doing all this and much more will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear i share leon panetta's and our service chief's serious concerns about the impact sequestration would have on our armed forces. and as someone who has run businesses, i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources and our national security. if confirmed, i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayer dollar the right way to maintain the st
of the nato intervention. as someone who's studied this region and i have to say i was reading your congressional testimony about north africa yesterday, it's incredibly prophetic, you've gone before congress many times, how much do you see the intervention in libya as a moment that pushed us toward these effects we're now seeing? >> i think it did push us entirely. the question for me was, was it intended, was it ignored? because i think where i differ with some people, we have to remember what happened before the intervention. we have to remember that they requested intervention. we have to remember that gadhafi was threatening to hand down all the people in the streets. we also have to remember that at that time the revolution had started in tunisia and it had jumped to egypt and so it seemed to me that if you have a choice between not allowing people to be mowed down in the streets, you do that. now the link i see with other places is once you intervene, probably the intervention is always easy, it is the aftermath. >> that's what we learned. >> and i think the question that i h
to the parliamentarians of nato. these parliamentarians were very supportive of american drone policy and many of the nato countries are developing their own programs. i asked in english baroness, what will she say when china or iran vaporizes someone on the london bridge because they believe they are a threat to their country? what would you possibly say to object when the argument for drones that we now have the authority to take out anyone or anything in other countries that threaten us? it is anathema under international law. after world war two, we developed an international law that developed stability where countries have to take steps before they go to war. they cannot act unilaterally. the obama and bush administrations have torn that structure down. what is left is the state of nature. the american government that played such a key role in developing this international law is returning the world to a state of nature where the strongest country does whatever it wants. you have to ask yourself -- what happens when we are no longer the strongest country? what happens when there is another country t
the world bank and nato that protected our interest and benefited people and nations around the world. yet it is undeniable that a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions, setting norms and shaping international affairs. now two decades after the end of the cold war, we faced a different world. more countries than ever have a voice in global debates. we see more paths to power opening up as nations gain influence to the strength of their economies rather than their militaries are going political and technological changes are empowering nonstate actors, like active this, corporations and terrorist networks. at the same time, we face challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that spill across borders and defy unilateral solutions. as president obama has said, the old post-war architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats. so the geometry of global power has become more distributed and diffused as the challenges we face have become more complex and crosscutting. so the question we ask ourselves every day is, w
lended to this. she's been one of the driving forces behind nato's no-fly zone over libya in order to prevent qadhafi from massacring his own people. and through deft diplomacy, she has slowly opened burma to the outside world. she's encouraging them to free political prisoners, hold parliamentary elections and finally permit foreign investment. and it's happening before our eyes. and, of course, she has taken special interest in the poorest nation in the western hemisphe hemisphere, an island nation right off of the east coast of the united states, less than an hour and a half flight time from miami. that's the island of haiti. the island nation of haiti on what is an island that christopher columbus was expected to have been the island that he landed, hispaniola now encompassing haiti and the dominican republic. and she has made haiti one of the top foreign policy projects, helping the impoverished island build back better after the devastating earthquake that killed over a quarter million people. in no small measure has her husband -- president clinton -- been a part of that att
the lead in the war with the taliban. nato troops will start to scale back their involvement. >> there's consideration for an enduring presence here which will be to train, advice and assist. we'll continue that work in the aftermath of 2014. at the end of 2014, i'm confident the afghan national security forces can defend this country and the people. >> u.s. troops have been in afghanistan for 11 years. >>> time now, 7:17. happening right now in washington, d.c., the senate's first hearing on gun violence since the deadly school shooting in newtown, connecticut. something dramatic just happened. former congresswoman gabby giffords shock at the hearing -- smoke a the hearing calling for -- spoke at the hearing calling for lawmakers to do something. kyla campbell reports from our washington, d.c. newsroom. >> reporter: hi, dave. gabrielle giffords just spoke. it was very brief. we're gonna take a look at the hearing. gab -- gabrielle giffords stepped away from her my my row phone. five people are scheduled to testifying including mark kelly. giffords and kelly have been pushing for tight
, this time in turkey, a nato ally. we'll talk to a man that knows all about turkey, retired lieutenant ralph peters and why they targeted the embassy now. imagine being on a flight and pilot passing out in midair? this happened last night. terrifying ordeal just ahead. and president's pick getting harsh reviews for his performance at confirmation hearing. why was chuck hagel so unprepared? >> correct or incorrect, yes or no? >> my reference. >> are you going to answer the question. the question is, were you right or wrong? ♪ i don't wanna be right [ record scratch ] what?! it's not bad for you. it just tastes that way. [ female announcer ] honey nut cheerios cereal -- heart-healthy, whole grain oats. you can't go wrong loving it. >>. >> alisyn: we want to tell you new developments on the growing crisis with iran and nuclear program. rogue nation announcing plans to ramp up uranium enrichment facilities. they will install advanced centrifuges that could speed up the enrichment process. u.s. calling this, quote a provocative step and comes as the u.s. continues to try to convince iran to end
's border? who secures israel's border? it has been suggested that this is a peacekeeping role for nato. that is what that was all about. >> my time has expired. i would like to ask you one more question. i understand you may be statement indicating that there is no justification for palestinian suicide bombers. but that there's also no justification for israel to "keep palestinians caged up like animals." did you say that and, if so, do you stand by that today? >> well, i said it. and remember the context for when i said it. >> do you believe today that israel kids palestinians caged up like animals? >> if i had in a party to edit that, i would like to go bad -- and -- if i had an opportunity to edit that, i would like to go back. i said many things over many years. it was a larger context. the frustration and what is happening that is not in israel's interest, to find ways to find peace and security to israel. if i had a chance to go back and ended it, i would. i regret having used those words. >> thank you. >> senator lee. senator kane. >> it was good to see with my dear friend senat
for the u.n., world bank, and nato that defended universal values and benefited peoples and nations around the world. a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions and shaping international affairs. two decades after the end of the cold war, we face a different war. more countries than ever have a voice in global debate. nations gain influence through the strength of their economies rather than their militaries. nine state actors are empowered. we faced challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that spill across borders and the fight unilateral solutions. the old postwar architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats. the geometry has become more distributed and defused as the challenges we face have become more complex and crosscutting. the question we ask every day is what does this mean for america? how can we invents our interests and also appalled a just rule based international order, a system that does provide clearer rules of the road to fair labor standards. we have to be smart about how we use our powe
.n., the i.m.f., the world bank and nato, that benefited peoples and nation around the world but it is undeniable that a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions, setting norms and shaping international affairs. now, two decades after the end of the cold war, we face a different world. more countries than ever have a voice in global debates. we see more paths to power opening up as nations gain influence through the strength of their economies rather than their militaries and political and technological changes are empowering non-state actors like activists, corporations and terrorist networks. at the same time, we face challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that's still across borders and defy unilateral solutions. has said, thebama old post-war architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats, so the geometry of global power has become more distributed and diffuse as the challenges we face have become more complex and cross-cutting. so the question we ask ourselves every day is what does this
the french from being able to come into a country. they need to be able to stop nato from coming into countries on the continent. europe would not allow other foreigners to do this in europe. why would the africans allow this? they should not allow foreigners who colonized the bus and insulate us in the past to do this. these are our enemies. what is the true motive of the french for coming into mali? it is certainly not because they care. they are former colonial masters, people that enslaved us. these are our enemies. what is the reason they have come? certainly not because they care. guest: i think we are in agreement that most people -- the u.s. administration, the state department has noted in a statement that general ham said earlier also, everybody would like this to be an african-led solution. it's the only way to go ahead. unfortunately, although many of the african countries talk a great deal about getting involved, with the exception of a few. niger, i mentioned earlier. morocco has been leading on this, raising awareness on this issue for some time. mali, a year-and-a
could say about him? the nato bombing killed ultimately, if you include all of the allied movement, over 30,000 people ended up dying. if you look at the fall of libya and what he did, some people have our dimension it has the best health-care system and africa and the best literacy. people throughout africa said they did support ghadafi and did not want to bomb. libya has accepted sharing resources with others, unlike other regions like nigeria. there were given shelter and food. he supported them as brothers when they came in. not only that, but before the u.s. had basically control over most of the communications systems and africa, he put up several billion dollars for satellite systems so that africans would not have to pay the rental fees. the africans paid much less for communications across the country. i think you're giving a very one-sided picture of it. can you tell us what you think he did that was good and any criticism of the u.s. bombing? guest: there are a couple of good things i can say. one was the promotion of women in this society. he was very pronounced about that. w
this rebalancing even as we continue to work closely, closely with our longtime allies of nato and our friends and with allies and partners and friends of other regions of the world. at the same time, we will continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where were have clear national interests. rather, it's a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. and the asia-pacific is vital to america's interests. doing all of this, and much more, will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear, i share leon panetta's and our service chief's serious concerns about the impact sequestration would have on our armed forces. and as someone who has run businesses i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources in our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayer's dollar the right way. to maintenance the strongest military in the world and to working with congress to ensure the dep
-time allies of nato, and our friend, and with allies and partners and friends in other raoegs of th region -gs of the world. at the same time we will focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where we have clear national interests. it's a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. in the asian make of area, it's increasingly vital to america's security and economic interest, that's why we must become even more engaged in the region over the coming years. doing all this and much more will require smart and stra taoepblg is budget decisions. i have made it clear i share pan pan's and our service chief's serious concerns about the impact sequestration would have on our armed forces. as someone who has run businesses i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources and our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently, using every single taxpayers' dollar the right way to maintain the strongest military in the world, and to workin
longtime allies of nato and our friends and with allies and partners and friends in other regions of the world. at the same time we'll continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where we have clear national interests. rather as a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. in the asia pacific area is increasingly vital to america's security and economic interests. that's why we must become even more engaged in the region over the incoming years. during all of this and much more will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear i'm sure leon panetta and the concerns of the impact just ration will have on our armed forces. as someone who has run businesses, i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources and our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayers' dollars the right way, to maintain the strongest military in the world and to working with congres
. another thing to add, turkey is a nato ally of the u.s. and in the last morning the u.s. has dispatched hundreds of u.s. personnel, as well as patriot missiles near the border between turkey and syria to help protect turkey from aircraft, air strikes, missile strikes from syria. this gives you a little of the political background as rescue workers scramble in ankara in the wake of this deadly explosion near the u.s. embassy. john. >> and just this week so much going on in the region, going on in the world. the news of the israeli bomb strike in syria. news in the united states, hillary clinton's last day at the state department today. some significant events going on around the world. are these the types of things that authorities will be looking at to piece together if there was a motive behind whoever might be behind it? >> listen, no question that the tension in the region has been ratcheting up. not only because of the raging syrian civil war. with the u.s. backing the opposition and rebels, others like iran backing the syrian regime. under immense pressure and losing grund. but wit
to the placement of pay ttriot missiles. >> reporter: the turkish government asked nato to place the missiles along the border of syria to deter any threat of the ballistic attacks, but the turkish group opposed them to operate the patriots. friday's suicide bombing was not the first time that western diplomatic areas have been attacked in turkey. in 1993 al qaeda killed scores of people as well as the consko late. and in istanbul six people were killed there as people fought to protect the building. the security measures work. twice in six years attackers have failed to break into u.s. diplomatic missions in turkey, but that is due in large part to turkish guards who lost their lives as the first line of protection. wolf? >> ivan watson, thank you. let's get a closer look at the united states embassy right now, and cnn's tom foreman is joining us. tom, show us how the em embassy is laid out in ankara. >> well, ankara is the second largest city in turkey, and the capital, and if you take the largest metro area, it is home of the government, and the u.s. embassy in the middle of everything with the
. the president moved and decided he was going to become engaged to nato in ways that met our interests at the time it got the job done. i thought it was smart. the way he approached that was very effective and the results were exactly what we wanted to cheat. -- achieve. we could tell if we did this -- results were exactly what we wanted to achieve. we recommended no-fly. those things were put into place. i think the american people approved of the way that was handled. we had just come out of iraq. the aftermath of all of these places, we need to spend some time on this. there is a monumental transformation taking place. this is the biggest upheaval of the bill that part of the world -- in that part of the world since the ottoman empire. many of the country's -- countries lines were drawn in relatively arbitrary ways. people were put in places of power. it is a highly sectarian, divided, tribal part of the world. i am not sure every policy has always been as sensitive or thoughtful about that as it ought to be. >> i want to clarify. on my state about libya, i was -- statement about li
allies of nato and our friends and with allies and partners and friends in other regions of the world. at the same time we'll continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where we have clear national interests. rather as a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. in the asia pacific area is increasingly vital to america's security and economic interests. that's why we must become even more engaged in the region over the incoming years. during all of this and much more will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear i'm sure leon panetta and the concerns of the impact just ration will have on our armed forces. as someone who has run businesses, i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources and our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayers' dollars the right way, to maintain the strongest military in the world and to working with congress to ensure t
Search Results 0 to 39 of about 40 (some duplicates have been removed)